National parks generated $26.5 billion in economic activity last year. Zion National Park contributed $185.5 million/Deby Dixon photo of Zion Canyon
"This property is of no value to the Government."
"...if it cannot be occupied and cultivated, why should we make a public park of it? If it cannot be occupied by man, why protect it from occupation? I see no reason in that."
How times have changed.
Those two statements, the first from U.S. Sen. John Conness in 1864 as he urged the chamber to protect the Yosemite Valley, and the second from Sen. Cornelius Cole in 1872 in opposing legislation to create Yellowstone National Park, painted two of the more glorious units of today's National Park System as worthless tracts of land. Today they are viewed as part of a $26.5 billion economic engine that supports 240,000 jobs and countless businesses, large and small.
While Sen. Conness had to persuade his colleagues that Yosemite was worthless, and Sen. Cole believed Yellowstone to be worthless, today the National Park Service points to the economic worth of the parks.
'National parks are often the primary economic engines of many park gateway communities,' Park Service Director Jon Jarvis said last week in announcing the fiscal impacts of the park system. 'While park rangers provide interpretation of the iconic natural, cultural and historic landscapes, nearby communities provide our visitors with services that support hundreds of thousands of mostly local jobs.
"... The big picture of national parks and their importance to the economy is clear,' the director added. 'Every tax dollar invested in the National Park Service returns $10 to the U.S. economy because of visitor spending in gateway communities near the 401 parks of the National Park System.'
Lodging is the biggest business in the park system, generating $4.4 billion in economic activity last year, notes the report, 2013 National Park Visitor Spending Effects, Economic Contributions to Local Communities, States, and the Nation. Next in line, not too surprisingly, is dining and drinking (yes, bar drinking), which contributed $2.9 billion.
In 2013, NPS visitors spent a total of $14.6 billion in local gateway communities while visiting NPS lands. These expenditures directly supported over 143 thousand jobs, $4.2 billion in labor income, $6.9 billion in value added, and $11.2 billion in output in the national economy. The secondary effects of visitor spending supported an additional 94 thousand jobs, $5.0 billion in labor income, $8.8 billion in value added, and $15.3 billion in output in the national economy. Combined, NPS visitor spending supported a total of 238 thousand jobs, $9.2 billion in labor income, $15.6 billion in value added, and $26.5 billion in output in the national economy.
Which park system unit contributed the most to that total? The Blue Ridge Parkway, which generated nearly $1 billion ($999.3 million) in business last year, according to the report, followed closely by Great Smoky Mountains National Park with $943.2 million.
The report also noted that overall visitation to the parks was down in 2013, in large part due to the partial government shutdown in October, and due to ongoing impacts from Hurricane Sandy, which swept up the Eastern Seaboard in October 2012.
What was not part of the report, but which would be equally important in assessing the overall value of the National Park System, would be an analysis of the ecological worth of the parks. What value are the forests that act as air and water filters? How important to the nation are the flora and fauna protected by the parks? Let's measure the ecological, and economic, value of coastal wetlands and barrier islands at places such as Everglades National Park, Gulf Islands National Seashore, and Assateague Island National Seashore, that not only provide critical habitat for shorebirds, waterfowl, and fish, but also serve as storm buffers.
If the Park Service feels it must tout the dollar-impact of the parks to generate Congressional and public support, it could similarly bolster that argument by defining the "natural capital" that resides in the park system.
"Nature has provided ecosystems and their benefits to us for free. However, perhaps because this capital has been provided freely to us, we humans have tended to view it as limitless, abundant, and always available for our use, exploitation, and conversion. The concept of an ecosystem as natural capital can help us analyze the economic behavior that has led to the overuse of so much ecological wealth. If we can understand this behavior better, then perhaps we can find ways to manage and enhance what is left of our natural endowment. -- Edward B. Barbier, Capitalizing on Nature, Ecosystems as Natural Assets.
Comments
OK, folks, we're not going to let this thread take off down that rabbit hole. Stick to the topic, please, and don't let it drift.
Lee - The "Clowns of Congress" as you like to so affectionately call them created Parks. A little late to be getting concerned about them being involved.
Congress today is a whole lot different than in the past.
Once again, extreme caution should always be the primary guiding principle.
Response withheld to avoid the rabbit hole.
Climbing back out of the rabbit hole.
It is obvious that some things are just priceless. I believe that our National Parks (monuments, seashores etc) are.
We will keep building and transforming the natural world right up to the boundaries of many NP. The more people the more restrictive the National Parks will have to become. The mountain bike trails will be so crowded that hikers will be blazing new trails to stay out of their way. Visitors bring their ORVs to Seashore beaches where there are so many vehicles that your car can be blocked in where you can't leave, flora is destroyed, sea turtles false crawls rise and colonial bird nesting is disrupted.
I question if any National Parks, sporting events, concerts etc cause any economic value. The most they do is direct money from one geographic area to another. The National Parks should not concern themselves with local economic issues beyond the Organic Act and the Enabling Legislation of that Park. Those should be more than enough to stimulate the local economy (away from some other local economy). The exception I always encounter is the foreign tourists that come to US National Parks exactly for the attributes that the Organic Act seeks to protect. They are here spending their money and not in some other country because the Organic Act is protecting increasingly priceless attributes not because of local economic success. I assume 20% is a considerable sum and many of these tourists are going to spend money and take in other venues not related to the NP. Maybe they will stay in Vegas for 2 nights on their way to Zion like I did one time.
Beachdumb,
There are no unbiased economic studies that even remotely suggest that a 35% drop in visitation is a result of NPS management. It is pure fantasy on your part intended to promote a personal agenda. June and July the traditional summer months that normally have no weather impacts on Hatteras Island are not down, even though resource closures are at there peak. I know because right now as I write the shops are full and there is road traffic everywhere on Hatters Island. If there were any smoking local economic guns aimed at access and visitation the ORV groups would have it out there.
Buxton, visitation was down before the issues with ferry started. Visitation dropped nearly million after 2002 and has yet to recover. I did not mean a 35% drop in visitation,which I clarified when Kurt questioned. Business owners on the island have said, and on the record, that they have seen up to a 35% decline economicly. This decline was directly correlated with the new resource closures in the shoulder season but the summer season drop was minimal. We used visit several times in the spring but no longer since most of the desirable locations are closed.
You know that access on/off the island has always been an issue. I can remember always waiting on water/tide to recede in the 80s and 90s.
Beachdumb
A lot of people now schedule their ORV fishing vacations in the fall when the fishing is better and resource protection measures are minimal. I know what the busness say about the resource closures but there is little to no substantial evidence to support it. My andotoyal observation says the resource closures have at best a minimal affect compared to weather events and highway 12 access on visitation or the local economy.
The yearly economic result of resource closures is at most negligible, otherwise someone would have some hard facts to back it up with. Mostly I see the economic gambit as a ploy to relax ORV rules.
Then again because I love Hatteras Island and the NPS even if it were proven that the ORV rules had a profound negative affect on the local economy the Organic Act, the EL for CHNS and the historic conditions of this place would dictate to me the management of CHNS.